MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019700691

Hierarkkisen vahvistusoppimisen soveltuvuuden arviointi videopelien kehittämisessä

2024· other· en· W7019700691 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAaltodoc (Aalto University) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Reinforcement learningTask (project management)Video gameOrder (exchange)Work (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis we explore the feasibility of using hierarchical reinforcement learning (HRL) in video game development to create non-player characters (NPC). NPCs are a crucial part of video games affecting many parts of the game, including storytelling, atmosphere, and importantly work as opponents and teammates. Using traditional methods to create NPCs in video games can be a lengthy and difficult process requiring expert knowledge. Reinforcement learning (RL) has shown potential, but has remained largely unused in video game development due to some major issues. HRL provides solutions to these issues, allowing the complex task to be split into smaller, easier to learn sub-tasks. We design, implement, and study a new HRL method with the potential of creating NPCs with multiple competency levels with minimal effort. Our design is based on a goal-conditional framework which we modify to suit our goals. Instead of using a goal-vector we repurpose it to a skill-vector, which could allow us to mask it and re-train the higher-level policy to prevent certain skills from being used. In order to experiment with our HRL method, we create an physics based quadruped locomotion environment that has possibility for learning multiple different skills. We evaluate our method with and without information hiding in attempt to force certain types of behaviours for the policy levels. The method shows potential in our experiments but requires further experimentation and engineering to create multiple competency levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.175

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAaltodoc (Aalto University)French-language works237,207